Hi Raphael, I curious as why you are using software flow. I thought
the inline was better from a performance perspective on the router..
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 6:45 AM, Raphael Mazelier <r...@futomaki.net> wrote:
> I'm testing wanguard with my mx.
> The product is interresting, not perfect, but interresting.
>
> I'm not using inline ipfix, but software flow with the below configuration :
>
>
> sampling {
> input {
> rate 1000;
> }
> family inet {
> output {
> flow-server 15.5.17.7 {
> port 5678;
> source-address 15.5.17.10;
> version 5;
> }
> }
> }
> }
>
> with Flow protocol : Netflow v5,v7 or v9, IPFIX.
>
> The wanguard documentation specifie that if we are using juniper and ipfix,
> we habe to choose Flow protocol "IPFIX with flows Timeout".
>
>
> --
> Raphael Mazelier
> AS39605
>
>
> Le 26/01/15 05:29, Jordan Whited a écrit :
>>
>> If clocks are sync’d my best guess would be that your active and/or
>> inactive flow timeouts are longer than what is configured on the collector
>> and it doesn’t like that.
>>
>> Try making them match the collector and if that doesn’t work make the MX
>> timeouts slightly shorter.
>>
>>
>> http://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos12.3/topics/task/configuration/services-ipfix-flow-template-flow-aggregation-configuring.html
>> <http://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos12.3/topics/task/configuration/services-ipfix-flow-template-flow-aggregation-configuring.html>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
